Chevy Bolt - 200 mile range for $30k base price (after incentive)

[ggies07]

I'm most disappointed by the tactic Mary Barra took with the jabs at Tesla and in light of GMs active blocking of Tesla being able to sell their cars directly to the consumer. GM isn't in it for 'us' but for themselves, so they don't get my vote if and until they change their tune. They wanted to be first to market with a long range, affordable BEV - super, great, they did it. But for anyone who thinks that the Bolt is remotely in the same league as the upcoming Model 3, you're dreaming or in denial.

+1 We all know Volt was in response to Tesla and now again, it's the same with the Bolt. It would have been nice for Mary and GM to come out and say they are following in the footsteps of Tesla because it's the right thing to do and where the future is going. But instead, it's who "did it first".

Look, I'm one of the people that hopefully will get a Model 3, but if it's a few thousand out of my range, then I'll have to settle for this car or the Gen II Leaf. And right now, because of their attitude, I'll go for the LEAF.

 

[1101011]

Help me out. What is all this stuff?

 

[electracity]

Tahoe and Cadillac CTS owner. It's not GM hate. I am skeptical about a compact EV with GM interiors, GM dealers, and GM first gen problems changing the world. People don't buy Sparks or Volts in large numbers now, and dealers don't try to sell ELRs, Volts, or Bolts. I'm just envisioning that GM is going to have to take big losses to get these off lots at haggle rates when a compelling, faster, funner, and sharper Tesla is out for less.

The lack of Volt sales is the big question mark for the Bolt, IMO. GM didn't even put the gen II 2016 Volt for sale in locations other than the the west coast. Too much gen 1 inventory most places, I think.

The Bolt and/or the M3 needs to become "a thing", a trend, like the Prius. The success, and the decline, of the Prius is not fully understood.

I have no doubt that Tesla can build a compelling model 3. The question is whether they can make money making the car, and when it will be delivered.

 

[jgs]

Guys, check out this Bolt demo video by GM. It has a number of things which are better than the Model S. Will the Model 3 have a configurable touchscreen, paddle regen, regen to full stop, wifi hotspot, auto park 'gear', camera based rear view wide angle 'mirror', top view parking, service centers everywhere, ability to have a car fixed in a day rather than a 2 week wait, etc?

Chevrolet Bolt Chief Engineer Takes Us Inside GMs 200-Mile Electric Car - Video - Inside EVs

Yeah, I know, lack of fast charge network, but don't kid yourself, Tesla is behind of a huge number of features than Mr. And Mrs. Middle American want. And to them, GM is a safer choice than Tesla.

A few of those things are unequivocally better (if delivered well). Some of them are debatable. Some are just "eew" (paddle regen).

Agreed that resting on laurels would be a huge mistake. I doubt Tesla intends to do so.

I do think "huge" is hyperbole.

 

[David99]

I simply cannot believe that they wouldn't have some sort of fast DC charging solution.

I'm pretty confident that already are working on it and building it. Most likely not on their own, but with partners.

 

[bonnie]

I'm most disappointed by the tactic Mary Barra took with the jabs at Tesla and in light of GMs active blocking of Tesla being able to sell their cars directly to the consumer. GM isn't in it for 'us' but for themselves, so they don't get my vote if and until they change their tune. They wanted to be first to market with a long range, affordable BEV - super, great, they did it. But for anyone who thinks that the Bolt is remotely in the same league as the upcoming Model 3, you're dreaming or in denial.

+1 We all know Volt was in response to Tesla and now again, it's the same with the Bolt. It would have been nice for Mary and GM to come out and say they are following in the footsteps of Tesla because it's the right thing to do and where the future is going. But instead, it's who "did it first".

Look, I'm one of the people that hopefully will get a Model 3, but if it's a few thousand out of my range, then I'll have to settle for this car or the Gen II Leaf. And right now, because of their attitude, I'll go for the LEAF.

Yes, GM took shots at Tesla. It's their only chance. I just laughed. Mary Barra showed she was an amateur when it comes to slinging mud Tesla's way. They've had much worse aimed at them and come out just fine.

Here's the net result: People I know who would NEVER EVER EVER EVER consider an electric car are asking me questions about -whoa- driving electric and the Bolt. They probably won't be first in line, but they're thinking about it now. And by the time they're ready to buy, I'm sure there will be a Model 3 (and maybe other choices) on the market. Tesla won't have to convince them that driving electric will work for them, because GM will have already done that heavy lifting.

The Bolt will bring more educated/partially educated customers to Tesla's door. And Bolt buyers will check out Tesla offerings the next time around. Most of those buyers would not have purchased an EV to begin with. I just can't see how any of this is a bad thing.

 

[ecarfan]

Guys, check out this Bolt demo video by GM. It has a number of things which are better than the Model S. Will the Model 3 have a configurable touchscreen, paddle regen, regen to full stop, wifi hotspot, auto park 'gear', camera based rear view wide angle 'mirror', top view parking, service centers everywhere, ability to have a car fixed in a day rather than a 2 week wait, etc?
Chevrolet Bolt Chief Engineer Takes Us Inside GMs 200-Mile Electric Car - Video - Inside EVs

To people who have never driven a quality EV like a Tesla, many of the Bolt features pointed out in this video will seem amazing. To Tesla owners there is very little in this video that is surprising.
We know that Teslas have had "one pedal" driving from the beginning. In this video the Bolt is shown quickly coming to a stop without using the brake pedal. But the car is only going 5 or 10mph! My S does that too. That's just how EVs should work. We do not know how quickly the Bolt would stop on regen only when it is going at real world speeds of 35mph and above, but it certainly will not be as quickly as shown in that video.
The Bolt center display is shown as being "configurable", but the driver side display is not. The S/X drivers and center display is configurable.
The Bolt center screen is 10", and the Chevy engineer was careful to phrase that as something like "the biggest screen display in any GM car". Seems small to Tesla owners, but certainly large to anyone who drives a car other than a Tesla. I am certain the Model 3 center screen will be much larger than 10".
The Bolt rear view mirror can be switched to rear camera view with "80 degrees" of coverage. I have always left my S rear view camera image at the top of my center display and it has a wider field of view and a much larger image than the Bolt rear view.
Yes the Bolt does have a few minor (to me) features that Tesla does not have yet. But overall I was not impressed with what that video showed of the over US$37K Bolt.
I want the Bolt to be a sales success for GM! That will be good for EVs in general and for Tesla. But given that GM is hobbled by their dealership network and there is no useful long distance charging network for the Bolt I don't know if it will succeed. Plus DC charging is an option. I wonder how many thousands of dollars it is going to cost.
GM dealer salespeople are unlikely to promote the Bolt over other GM ICE vehicles in the same price range. GM faces an uphill battle selling the Bolt.

 

[scottf200]

Yes, GM took shots at Tesla. It's their only chance. I just laughed. Mary Barra showed she was an amateur when it comes to slinging mud Tesla's way. They've had much worse aimed at them and come out just fine.

Here's the net result: People I know who would NEVER EVER EVER EVER consider an electric car are asking me questions about -whoa- driving electric and the Bolt. They probably won't be first in line, but they're thinking about it now. And by the time they're ready to buy, I'm sure there will be a Model 3 (and maybe other choices) on the market. Tesla won't have to convince them that driving electric will work for them, because GM will have already done that heavy lifting.

The Bolt will bring more educated/partially educated customers to Tesla's door. And Bolt buyers will check out Tesla offerings the next time around. Most of those buyers would not have purchased an EV to begin with. I just can't see how any of this is a bad thing.

To your point if GM had not made the Volt and enticed me to buy it and try plug-in electric (fit my commute and activities) ... then I would not have been interested or even looked at Tesla (assumed would fail like so may car companies).

NOW I'm getting a Tesla X that is way way beyond any price I'd imagined I'd spend on a car. The Volt was my first GM vehicle. The X will be my first Tesla vehicle. Glad your one of the folks that are [not] so self/Tesla "involved" to see how this works ... excellent!!

Re: I just laughed.
It is hilarious that people take PR seriously. Like the PR folks are talking to them directly and they are personally offended. It is just marketing. Are they that naive?

UPDATE: left out the "not" in my sentence that made it sound 180 degrees different than I meant. Oops. Sorry, bonnie.

 

[dhanson865]

I wonder how long the Model 3 will qualify for the full federal tax credit. There have been a little over 60k model S's sold in the United States. If Tesla sells 25k Model S's per year and 25k Model X's pear year in the United States in 2017 and 2018, there will only be 40k slots before the tax credit starts to phase out for Tesla. When they're selling the S, X and 3 at the same time, it probably won't be long before the phase-out is hit (like 6 months). Then you get 2 quarters of 50% tax credit and 2 quarters of 25% tax credit. If the Bolt is only expected to sell 30k units per year, the Chevy's tax credit may last longer than Tesla's.

Every month someone else brings this up I quote myself and update the stats. Just keep in mind the original post was in reply to a much more negative post than yours.

JB Straubel- Model 3 will be mostly NEW technology - Page 13

The current rate has them selling more than 20,000 in the US for 2015. Ramping up Model X and production in general might trigger the 200,000 mark in 2018? I figure it'll be a Model 3 that is the 200,000th sold in the US (or at least Model 3 sales will be under the 200,000 mark and contribute to the total).

The phase-out period stretches over one year, beginning in the second calendar quarter after the quarter in which the manufacturer hits the 200,000 vehicle US sales mark. From there, all qualifying vehicles sold by the manufacturer are eligible for 50% of their specified credit for the first two quarters and 25% of the credit for the next two quarters.

For example if a manufacturer sells its 200,000th vehicle in the first quarter (Q1) of 2018, the credit amounts for all of that manufacturer's eligible vehicles would phase out as shown in the table below.

Tax Credit Phase-Out Schedule Quarter Credit
Q1 2018 Full amount
Q2 2018 Full amount
Q3 2018 50% of full amount
Q4 2018 50% of full amount
Q1 2019 25% of full amount
Q2 2019 25% of full amount
Q3 2019 No credit

It's entirely possible that it will trigger sooner and run out sooner but the important concept is that it doesn't go away immediately and when it starts going away it diminishes slowly not all at once.

If Tesla is pumping out 10,000 plus a month in 2018 they could easily sell 50,000 or more with the full tax credit. They could then be selling double that amount in the next 6 months with half tax credit. And then double rate again with 1/4 tax credit. All in all hundreds of thousands of Model 3s could be sold with federal tax credit.

Keep in mind Tesla can game this slightly by focusing on overseas deliveries of Model S and Model X the month they are going to roll over 200,000 US deliveries. If that rolls them into the next quarter it extends the tax credit by 3 months no matter how many they sell after that.


Now to update the current totals at end of 2015 would be

US running total Tesla Sales vs 200,000 for federal credit phase out trigger
2011 end 1,900
2012 end 4,550 (2,650 for 2012 + prior year)
2013 end 22,200 (14,650 for 2013 + prior years)
2014 end 39,500 (17,300 for 2014 + prior years)
2015 end 65,414 (25,914 for 2015 + prior years, Model S and Model X)

Do the math if Tesla is doing ~25,000 a year US in 2015 how many years will it take to hit 200,000 US sales? They'll ramp up S and X production but there will still be plenty of discounts on Model 3.

Lets say 75,000 US for 2016 and 100,000 US for 2017, and maybe some of the tail of 2017 are founders/signature Model 3. Then in 1Q 2018 they open the floodgates and a ton of production Model 3s come out, in 2Q 2018 a ton of regular model 3s come out all with full tax credit. Hoorah, look at this again

Tax Credit Phase-Out Schedule Quarter Credit
Q4 2017 founders Model 3 with full credit
Q1 2018 signature Model 3 with Full credit
Q2 2018 production Model 3 with Full credit (will they be making 10,000 a week by then? Maybe 12 weeks worth is 100,000 Model 3s with full credit?)
Q3 2018 50% of full amount (maybe 100,000 Model 3s with half credit)
Q4 2018 50% of full amount (maybe 100,000 Model 3s with half credit, with extra production going outside the US)
Q1 2019 25% of full amount (maybe 100,000 Model 3s with quarter credit, with extra production going outside the US)
Q2 2019 25% of full amount (maybe 100,000 Model 3s with quarter credit, with extra production going outside the US)
Q3 2019 No credit

all in all they might get out 100,000 with full credit, 200,000 with half credit, and another 200,000 with quarter credit. I'd hardly call 500,000 Model 3s in 2018/2019 the same as your version of none of them getting the credit.

Shift that back a quarter and 100,000 less cars get a full credit, shift that forward a quarter and 100,000 more get a full credit. Just depends when they can start cranking out Model 3 en masse.

 

[tonybelding]

I noticed a couple of reports in the press from CES about the Bolt, and the general theme was: The Bolt will beat Model 3 to market, and it's all over for Tesla! That'll show those ridiculous upstart Silicon Valley "disruptors" how foolish it was to challenge the mighty automotive industry. Nobody will want a car from tiny, unknown Tesla when they could get a Chevy instead, and get it sooner too!

Ahem. Where to start? I do think the Bolt looks pretty good, and I expect it to be successful. However. . .

There's the absurdity of thinking there can only be one successful electric car in the world, and all others must be losers that will sink whatever unfortunate company they are attached to. The rest of the automotive industry has never worked like that, so I'm not sure why it's going to suddenly happen now. I think it's much more likely that "a rising tide lifts all boats", and the Chevy Bolt will help legitimize and energize the BEV sector.

The Bolt also has a couple of severe handicaps that it will need to overcome, relative to Tesla. It charges on the CSS standard, and there's no CSS equivalent to Tesla's Supercharger network. As far as I can see, nobody else is laying any plans to build anything similar to the Supercharger network.

I also have serious doubts about whether the Bolt will appeal to GM's customers. You know who GM's customers are, right? Yeah, their franchised dealers! GM is in the business of selling cars to dealerships, and I think dealers will continue to look askance at BEVs. They can sell gas cars quicker and more easily, and they can make more money servicing gas cars. So where's the appeal of the Bolt to them?

 

[scottf200]

A few of those things are unequivocally better (if delivered well). Some of them are debatable. Some are just "eew" (paddle regen).

The Volt has a max regen option that can always be on (L-low gear I've put 65K on my 2011 Volt in "Low). We have the paddle regen in the 2016 Volt and it works excellent. Very handy for corners, stoplights, and offramps that are slow ... and it added to the regen from "low". For stoplights/signs, it means you can let off your accel pedal just a little bit later ... which is great when you are in a variety of traffic situations with people following you. Paddle regen turns on the brake light too.

 

[Vitold]

The main difference is safety and comfort. I expect Bolt to fare badly in side and small overlap crash tests (but secretly I hope I'm wrong on that).

 

[JohnSnowNW]

I also have serious doubts about whether the Bolt will appeal to GM's customers. You know who GM's customers are, right? Yeah, their franchised dealers! GM is in the business of selling cars to dealerships, and I think dealers will continue to look askance at BEVs. They can sell gas cars quicker and more easily, and they can make more money servicing gas cars. So where's the appeal of the Bolt to them?

Yup, this is one of the reasons I asked why GM customers would purchase a Bolt over a Volt. There are a few reasons, other than pure BEV-ness, to go for the Bolt. However, cost is not one of them, and neither is practicality. Also, it would seem if the dealership had to choose between the two the Volt would be more appealing.

 

[tga]

The lack of Volt sales is the big question mark for the Bolt, IMO. GM didn't even put the gen II 2016 Volt for sale in locations other than the the west coast. Too much gen 1 inventory most places, I think.

Not correct - it's available in CA + 10 more CARB states: All-New Chevrolet Volt Sales Restricted to 11 States for First Model Year – News – Car and Driver | Car and Driver Blog

A friend who works part time at a MA Chevy dealer says Gen II is selling as well or better than Gen 1.

 

[FlasherZ]

View attachment 107640

Yes, tesla obviously does not have a clue about scaling...

You are being serious?

Tesla is doing NOTHING near the level that is required to generate 500,000 or 1,000,000 cars per year, much less GM's 9.9M in 2014.

Let's put it in perspective, last year Tesla delivered 0.5% of what GM did in 2014.

Tesla has its largest scaling issues ahead of it: sales, service, charging, production. You're already seeing overloading stress at Superchargers in California, production missed their original targets for 2015, some service centers have a month wait for moderate-level issues.

I want Tesla to succeed as much as the next person, but anyone who says GM doesn't have better scale than Tesla is fooling himself. Tesla will be able to figure it out, but GM *knows* scale. Perhaps I phrased it wrong when I said that Tesla hasn't figured out scaling yet -- they have, to a certain very limited (0.5%) extent, but nowhere near their lofty goals.

- - - Updated - - -

I also have serious doubts about whether the Bolt will appeal to GM's customers. You know who GM's customers are, right? Yeah, their franchised dealers! GM is in the business of selling cars to dealerships, and I think dealers will continue to look askance at BEVs. They can sell gas cars quicker and more easily, and they can make more money servicing gas cars. So where's the appeal of the Bolt to them?

It's not quite as simple as that, though. Dealerships don't get to unilaterally decide what gets sold... GM gets to manipulate end customer demand through advertising and marketing, and they get to drive sales to their dealerships through incentives (and even dictate in some cases that dealerships manage it). For some dealerships, the 1-2 Volt units they "required" dealers to take became quirky loaner cars that didn't sell; for others, it kick-started a bunch of sales that simply weren't there before.

The local Chevy dealership has a J1772 station installed at GM's insistence. I think it's been used to charge my car more than the 1-2 Volts they had.

 

[Breezy]

Help me out. What is all this stuff?

The battery, inverter, motor, cabling, radiators, windshield washer fluid reservoir and plumbing, brake fluid reservoir, booster and plumbing, etc. In terms of all of the stuff like radiators, cabling and plumbing, the Model S wouldn't look much different under the skin. It's just that Tesla doesn't usually show all the stuff.

 

[WarpedOne]

Tesla is doing NOTHING near the level that is required to generate 500,000 or 1,000,000 cars per year, much less GM's 9.9M in 2014.

Wrong, just wrong.

Tesla is doing everything necessary (GF) and GM is the one who is doing nothing (limited from the start up to 30k vehicles per year for at least next 4 years). No internal know how, not internal resources. Dependant on LG that is also doing nothing to expand.

Feel free to short the stock.

 

[FlasherZ]

Feel free to short the stock.

You're so far off base with my intentions of pointing out Tesla's challenges that I don't know where to start. If you actually read my posts, you'll see I'm one of the largest Tesla supporters there is (two multi-year waits for Signature vehicles), but I'm not blind to the reality of the business. It you think operating at 0.5% of one of the larger leaders in the same business is an example of scale, you and I have quite different definitions of scale.

The usual "short" comments are a great way to attempt to dismiss reality for fantasy, but have no basis here.

My best to you.

 

[flankspeed8]

You're so far off base with my intentions of pointing out Tesla's challenges that I don't know where to start. If you actually read my posts, you'll see I'm one of the largest Tesla supporters there is (two multi-year waits for Signature vehicles), but I'm not blind to the reality of the business. It you think operating at 0.5% of one of the larger leaders in the same business is an example of scale, you and I have quite different definitions of scale.

The usual "short" comments are a great way to attempt to dismiss reality for fantasy, but have no basis here.

My best to you.

The problem is there really is a Tesla distortion reality field where anyone who appears to post anything perceived as negative must be destroyed for their nefarious intentions. IMO this does nothing to help Tesla improve or increase the number of EV cars in the world regardless of manufacturer. Tesla has done amazing things, but they have also done some disappointing things. They are not a charity, they are a business and some times, decisions will be made based on economics, practicality, etc. GM is seeing this with the Bolt. Is it a perfect car? No way. But it is a start.

I am torn over what my next car will be. I HATE the dealership/service model and want to applaud Tesla for their innovation here, not that they had much choice.
On the other hand, GM will always be able to provide you with service and support because their reluctant dealer network is already scaled and I doubt they will refuse to service EV's because they are getting paid for them.

But Tesla also offers the innovation of the Super Chargers and ongoing improvement through OTA updates which I am sure GM dealers will fight.

On the other hand where I am in Minnesota is about -5f today and I am not sure that people who live in California and the south know how difficult it is for the average person who does not want to make a lot of sacrifice to run pure EV during a polar vortex. So I would argue that there is also a sensible and practical market for EREV cars also. We should be a big tent movement motivated by drastically reducing and eventually eliminating the use of oil for personal auto transport.

 

[WarpedOne]

Ok, so I'm blinded by those distortion fields...

Would you pleas explain this statement of yours then?

...and don't forget that GM knows how to scale, something Tesla hasn't figured out yet.

I'm understanding the above as:
GM knows how to scale production of electric vehicles, and tesla still does not know hot to increase production.

Please remove the distortion field from my eyes and let me see how GM is increasing production and tesla is standing still. Please.